Montrose Boulevard Improvements

[trymahjong]

……an interesting side note, the articulate ( read mainly fact based) young lawyer, who seemly lead the pursuit of “saving” those trees, has suddenly gone silent for the past two months…….

[editor]

10 hours ago, trymahjong said:

……an interesting side note, the articulate ( read mainly fact based) young lawyer, who seemly lead the pursuit of “saving” those trees, has suddenly gone silent for the past two months…….

Like the cement industry fitted him for a pair of shoes?

[kennyc05]

This road was in bad shape yesterday I had to drive in the middle Lanes to stay out of the huge puddles. It definitely needs a rebuild. 

 

 

[trymahjong]

Geeeeeeeeee

according to a kazillion tree lovers who vocally  opposed the Montrose TIRZ and mega posted on Montrose NextDoor……Uh……..Montrose doesn’t flood.

 

As far as I can decipher in treelover speak………Montrose was meant to collect rain water as part of drainage and might have some “ponding” might occur but shouldn’t be confused with “ flooding…..

 

guess the discussion will continue……

[hindesky]

After months of delays, the controversial redesign of Montrose Boulevard was still in limbo Monday night after a split vote at a contentious public meeting stalled the project yet again.

The Whitmire administration favors a design that would preserve more trees on the major thoroughfare, but reduce space for pedestrians and bicyclists. The engineering firm handling the proposal for the mayor's vision pitched a 60-day work plan to revise the project's first phase — stretching from Buffalo Bayou to West Clay Street — at a public meeting Monday held by the Montrose Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone, which is overseeing the project.

The Whitmire administration's three priorities were to improve drainage in the area, to preserve as many trees as possible, and to resurface the roadway, he said.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/environment/article/montrose-boulevard-tirz-overhaul-whitmire-trees-19851925.php

[j_cuevas713]

Yeah the measure failed, which is a good thing. That means the community is speaking up against these changes from the city. Let's see what the next design looks like. 

[hindesky]

An integral advocate behind Houston’s greenspaces penned a letter supporting the original Montrose Boulevard project. 

Guy Hagstette, the Senior Vice President of Parks and Civic Projects for the Kinder Foundation, took the opportunity to clarify misconceptions surrounding the original $14.7 million Montrose overhaul. 

A new plan was presented last week to the Montrose Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ), focusing on Whitmire’s vision for the boulevard, preserving trees and maintaining 12-foot general-purpose lanes. The board failed to pass the new design after extreme backlash from the community. 

Hagstette started his letter by saying it is inaccurate to say most of the live oaks would be cut down in the area. Secondly, he reiterated that the project was about improving drainage in the neighborhood and fixing a roadway that badly needs more than a facelift but a proper multimodal upgrade that would serve not only pedestrians but also drivers.

“Houston needs to do the hard work of addressing flooding, crumbling roadways, and inadequate sidewalks, or we will pay daily when we drive, walk, roll or ride in a big way when we flood, either in our frequent downpours or worse in another hurricane,” Hagstette said in the letter.

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/montrose-boulevard-houston-mayor-19868541.php

[mollusk]

Smart.  Distract the septuagenarian toddler with the shiny zoom zoom he wants and sneak the good stuff in for the rest of us. 🥷

[BeerNut]

 

[Amlaham]

1 hour ago, BeerNut said:

 

So...some missing sidewalks on the west side and wider lanes throughout....at this point we're better off holding off this project until this cocky mayor is out of office. He's coming off as "its my way or the highway".....literally 

[j_cuevas713]

2 hours ago, Amlaham said:

So...some missing sidewalks on the west side and wider lanes throughout....at this point we're better off holding off this project until this cocky mayor is out of office. He's coming off as "its my way or the highway".....literally 

He shouldn't have this much power. I'm scratching my head wondering why city council isn't checking him. He's not a dictator. I will say that the Gauge Engineering consultant looked as though he's getting pressure from Whitmire behind closed doors. He was reluctantly adamant to push the changes through this morning. And of course Whitmire's appointees also approved it. The only two minds who stood their ground were Watters and Noebels. In total 63 people wanted the old plan back while 10 liked the new plan. 

Edited November 1, 2024 by j_cuevas713

[trymahjong]

I’m hoping he decides to do something  else for a while……………..

 

[BigFootsSocks]

I don't understand what his reasoning is; why is he so spiteful with this? Is it Tillman, or whomever funded his "Democrat" campaign? This guy sucks.

[j_cuevas713]

And I stand corrected on the numbers it was 8 to 1 in favor of the old plan. The opposition now tried to frame anyone at the meeting as not having a job. They've gone from saying Montrose doesn't flood, to saving dead trees, to not needing the sidewalks, back to the drainage is needed, to "I've lived here for 35 years.", to "We never were against the drainage project or sidewalks." Those people need a mental health evaluation. Yet the mayor is choosing to listen to them over the majority. And with no proof or studies showing that 12ft lanes are needed.

Edited November 2, 2024 by j_cuevas713

[004n063]

18 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said:

And I stand corrected on the numbers it was 8 to 1 in favor of the old plan. The opposition now tried to frame anyone at the meeting as not having a job. They've gone from saying Montrose doesn't flood, to saving dead trees, to not needing the sidewalks, back to the drainage is needed, to "I've lived here for 35 years.", to "We never were against the drainage project or sidewalks." Those people need a mental health evaluation. Yet the mayor is choosing to listen to them over the majority. And with no proof or studies showing that 12ft lanes are needed.

In fairness, public meetings like that are pretty antidemocratic. His idea is just bad on the merits, as has been his entire Rob Ford-esque approach to the city's ROW

[j_cuevas713]

3 hours ago, 004n063 said:

In fairness, public meetings like that are pretty antidemocratic. His idea is just bad on the merits, as has been his entire Rob Ford-esque approach to the city's ROW

More of a Robert Moses style approach but point understood

[004n063]

9 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said:

More of a Robert Moses style approach but point understood

Eh, he's not bulldozing neighborhoods (yet). Ford's a stronger parallel imo

[hbg.50]

2 hours ago, 004n063 said:

Eh, he's not bulldozing neighborhoods (yet). Ford's a stronger parallel imo

Your opposition is more than Mayor Whitmire.   In every case where he has inserted himself in the middle it has been in response to neighborhood citizen's concerns (i.e., Houston Avenue, 11th Street, Shepherd/Durham, Montrose) including the most recent roundabout dust up. 

From my perspective the pro- bike lobby needs to make a stronger case for bike lanes and demonstrate more usage.  Otherwise, although vocal, it's a small constituency that has lost all the clout it had in city hall when Whitmire was elected.  I see him in office for another 7 years.

[Some one]

1 hour ago, hbg.50 said:

Your opposition is more than Mayor Whitmire.   In every case where he has inserted himself in the middle it has been in response to neighborhood citizen's concerns (i.e., Houston Avenue, 11th Street, Shepherd/Durham, Montrose) including the most recent roundabout dust up. 

From my perspective the pro- bike lobby needs to make a stronger case for bike lanes and demonstrate more usage.  Otherwise, although vocal, it's a small constituency that has lost all the clout it had in city hall when Whitmire was elected.  I see him in office for another 7 years.

The Montrose meeting had more than 63 people speak in opposition to the new plan, with only 10-20 people speaking in support. This isn't about the "neighborhood citizens' concern". It IS about Mayor Whitmire and a few vocal minorities who want to continue speeding up and down these corridors while disregarding (pedestrian) safety and are willing to squander federal money and rip out recently done projects to achieve that. The new plan was rushed, and the public found out about it a day or two before it was passed by the TIRZ. Contrast this with the original shovel-ready plan that had four years of extensive feedback and engagement.

Edited November 3, 2024 by Some one

[hbg.50]

1 hour ago, Some one said:

The Montrose meeting had more than 63 people speak in opposition to the new plan, with only 10-20 people speaking in support. This isn't about the "neighborhood citizens' concern". It IS about Mayor Whitmire and a few vocal minorities who want to continue speeding up and down these corridors while disregarding (pedestrian) safety and are willing to squander federal money and rip out recently done projects to achieve that. The new plan was rushed, and the public found out about it a day or two before it was passed by the TIRZ. Contrast this with the original shovel-ready plan that had four years of extensive feedback and engagement.

They allow public input at those meetings as a courtesy.  I’m not sure why…probably a requirement. The exact same thing happened at the Metro meeting regarding the University line.  What matters are the people who have a vote.  In this case the TIRZ members.

Do you really think people want to speed up and down Montrose?  I seriously doubt that is the objective.

[BeerNut]

24 minutes ago, hbg.50 said:

They allow public input at those meetings as a courtesy.  I’m not sure why…probably a requirement. The exact same thing happened at the Metro meeting regarding the University line.  What matters are the people who have a vote.  In this case the TIRZ members.

Do you really think people want to speed up and down Montrose?  I seriously doubt that is the objective.

Harris county voted for MetroNext and they killed that.  So voting doesn't matter with this administration.

Edited November 3, 2024 by BeerNut

[TXK]

24 minutes ago, hbg.50 said:

They allow public input at those meetings as a courtesy.  I’m not sure why…probably a requirement. The exact same thing happened at the Metro meeting regarding the University line.  What matters are the people who have a vote.  In this case the TIRZ members.

Do you really think people want to speed up and down Montrose?  I seriously doubt that is the objective.

Do you not believe that design choices influence behavior? Wider lanes are expected to encourage higher speeds, which are less safe on average. https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/street-design-elements/lane-width/

Not sure how you can say that neighborhood concerns are sufficient for the mayor change these projects while public comments in the planning phase are only perfunctory. How should our city government make decisions then?

[j.33]

2 hours ago, hbg.50 said:

Do you really think people want to speed up and down Montrose?  I seriously doubt that is the objective.

Houston Public Media said the new administration was looking at raising the speed limit. So yes, it seems like certain people want faster cars over the safety of pedestrians and cyclists.... 

"However, a proposal supported by Houston Mayor John Whitmire was voted on and passed after a majority of opponents spoke out about it. Under the Whitmire-backed proposal, traffic lanes on Montrose Boulevard would be widened to 12-feet each, with medians narrowed and cut into for turn lanes. Sidewalks would only be four-feet wide, trees removed, and potentially the speed limit raised." (https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/local/2024/11/01/504890/residents-voice-opposition-of-whitmire-backed-plan-for-montrose-boulevard-as-vote-passes/)

[hbg.50]

1 hour ago, j.33 said:

Houston Public Media said the new administration was looking at raising the speed limit. So yes, it seems like certain people want faster cars over the safety of pedestrians and cyclists.... 

"However, a proposal supported by Houston Mayor John Whitmire was voted on and passed after a majority of opponents spoke out about it. Under the Whitmire-backed proposal, traffic lanes on Montrose Boulevard would be widened to 12-feet each, with medians narrowed and cut into for turn lanes. Sidewalks would only be four-feet wide, trees removed, and potentially the speed limit raised." (https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/local/2024/11/01/504890/residents-voice-opposition-of-whitmire-backed-plan-for-montrose-boulevard-as-vote-passes/)

I honestly think that is fake news.  I don’t believe it.

Here is the Houston Landing reporting…no mention of increasing the speed limit.

https://houstonlanding.org/tirz-board-approves-revised-montrose-boulevard-project-with-same-lanes-fewer-sidewalks/

[hbg.50]

2 hours ago, TXK said:

Not sure how you can say that neighborhood concerns are sufficient for the mayor change these projects while public comments in the planning phase are only perfunctory. How should our city government make decisions then?

I’m not saying that at all.  I’m just pointing out that the mayor is not acting unilaterally.  There are other constituents he’s representing.

3 hours ago, BeerNut said:

Harris county voted for MetroNext and they killed that.  So voting doesn't matter with this administration.

Technically voters approved a feasibility study.  They left the final decision up to Metro.  Metro decided it was not financially feasible and killed the University line, or at least shelved it.

[Some one]

31 minutes ago, hbg.50 said:

I’m not saying that at all.  I’m just pointing out that the mayor is not acting unilaterally.  There are other constituents he’s representing.

Technically voters approved a feasibility study.  They left the final decision up to Metro.  Metro decided it was not financially feasible and killed the University line, or at least shelved it.

The mayor has not shown that he represents all of Houstonians, moreso just the constituents who he agrees with. He's been actively hostile to anyone who disagrees with him, even going as far as to call them "special interests" or "anti-car activists."

Regardless of how you spin it, it was sold to the voters as a bond to improve transit in the Houston Area. Gutting most of it without consulting the voters first is how you lose trust in the voters. It makes no sense to say that the UBRT wasn't financially feasible when they had almost a million dollars in federal funding, which would've helped paid almost half of the UBRT, but they squandered it when they killed the plan. The UBRT, like many other projects stalled, will likely make it a lot harder for Houston to receive federal funding for these types of projects in the future. So like the other poster said, what's the point of voting when city officials can just kill it because they don't like it.

[004n063]

20 hours ago, hbg.50 said:

Your opposition is more than Mayor Whitmire.   In every case where he has inserted himself in the middle it has been in response to neighborhood citizen's concerns (i.e., Houston Avenue, 11th Street, Shepherd/Durham, Montrose) including the most recent roundabout dust up. 

From my perspective the pro- bike lobby needs to make a stronger case for bike lanes and demonstrate more usage.  Otherwise, although vocal, it's a small constituency that has lost all the clout it had in city hall when Whitmire was elected.  I see him in office for another 7 years.

To your first point: it has been in response to people who have complained about being slowed down. Where are his responses to those of us who file regular complaints about being put in harms way by the lack of safe infrastructure for bikes or adequate sidewalks for pedestrians? What has he done in response to the multiple deaths of bicyclists and pedestrians since he has taken office?

To your second: if you're considering building a bridge, you don't wait until you see enough people swimming across. Our bike network is minimal and disconnected, and while there are neighborhoods - the Heights, Montrose, Eastwood, Second Ward, Third Ward - that are reasonably friendly to an experienced bicyclist who knows the grid well, they don't invite inexperienced bicyclists to try it out as a mode of transport, especially when most Houston destinations are not on those relatively comfortable side streets, but on major arterials.

This isn't an issue that a "pro-bike lobby" can solve - we need forward-thinking TIRZs, a forward-thinking city council, and a forward-thinking mayor.

Right now, we have a few of the first, three sixteenths of the second, and none of the third. 

[samagon]

can we stop painting this as some picture of usage?

the point of separating, and following safe design guidelines is to keep drivers from killing people.

providing a buffered area for bicycles to ride, even if only 20 people use the lane in a day provide a chance for us not to wake up one morning and read another story about a dead cyclist because of a distracted driver.

speed is the #1 thing in an accident that can make the difference between an accident and a death. rebuilding roads so they slow drivers down should be cheered by all in an effort to improve safety.

https://www.theleadernews.com/coast_to_coast/houston-pedestrian-accident-study/article_f94b7034-3937-11ef-9d97-fb5c12de84fb.html

[trymahjong]

22 hours ago, hbg.50 said:

Your opposition is more than Mayor Whitmire.   In every case where he has inserted himself in the middle it has been in response to neighborhood citizen's concerns (i.e., Houston Avenue, 11th Street, Shepherd/Durham, Montrose) including the most recent roundabout dust up. 

From my perspective the pro- bike lobby needs to make a stronger case for bike lanes and demonstrate more usage.  Otherwise, although vocal, it's a small constituency that has lost all the clout it had in city hall when Whitmire was elected.  I see him in office for another 7 years.

Oh my— you’ve laid down my nightmare making for next seven years…..

I admit to being unsophisticated.  I usually only get my information from what I actually observe.
For me that amounts to years and years of attending obscure community meetings, that others are unaware of till something random becomes a hot issue. Then suddenly— lots of new voices- usually in opposition……….but rarely with any first hand knowledge.

Also, after 20 years of hurricanes and big rains, I’ve noticed a lot of big water—lots of big standing water— as I use my rake to clear debris from storm drains. Big water that doesn’t seem to go anywhere.

I always ask, when I post, “ how many TIRZ meetings did you attend?” Sometimes,I find  that the number of meetings attended by the loudest opponents….were small. I sorta feel that way about Mayor Whitmire and his representatives.  BIG QUESTION: Is there another way to view the question of Montrose Blvd from someone who posts support of the project 5 years running? Let’s see.

Do you think Mayor Whitmire ever walked 6-7 blocks of Montrose Blvd? Do you think he might have sent one of his aides to walk those blocks and report back to him? Do he ever ask his wife or daughter to walk along Montrose Blvd? That could have been enlightening information gathering. Did he ever consider sending one of his handicapped staff? Did it occur to him to send one of his staffers, who have a few toddlers to do a walk? Those who have all of those “ well researched opinions” ever tried to walk a school age kid, who wants to ride a bike to Wharton those 8 blocks along Montrose?

I think  attention, should be paid,  to the voices of those who actual live very close to Montrose Blvd and have personal experiences of => 

*crossing Montrose Blvd ….with and without the aide of a traffic light….with and with out holding the hand of a toddler while holding a baby…or steadying a bicycle with training wheels….or maneuvering a double wide stroller. 

* trying to accompany a person in a wheelchair using or just being helped to use a wheel chair along Montrose. Use your imagination on being the one pushing that wheelchair because it’s hard to imagine anyone who might be able to self propel—- or have you ever heard the recollections of someone tried using an electric wheelchair on those sidewalks……? I have— it is a character building experience.

uhmmmmmmm I do live close, I have had those experiences— yes, even  putting a 90-year-in a “travel” wheel chair ( the kind I’m sure tourist must fly into town with) taking kiddos too young for school to the Art supply store then to Christie’s for a donut. Is my experience special? No. Just that I can tell you actual stuff that happened on foot— not observed from a car or bicycle— on foot. Read that to mean-  very close proximity to cars speeding down Montrose Blvd.

The  reality is………me, trying to use my car less and my walking skills more….,gets me absolutely no respect….. should my experiences warrant respect? Not if Houston intends to be car centric forever and ever. If the future, dictates alternative modes of transportation— then yup— maybe my experiences and those of other close by residents should be noted.

In Whitmire view from his Mayoral Office, I’m invisible— My experiences with Montrose Blvd- irrelevant. The needs of my wheelchair bound Mother, and school age grandchildren …..immaterial. I always ask the opposition to do just one long walk down Montrose Blvd— then consider there  are residents who, daily, use Montrose.  Those residents experience Montrose Blvd on foot, as all “walkable Montrose people” understand the reality of Montrose Blvd.  

How can it be such a mystery to Whitmire?- surely that street should be used for more than a speedy way to get from point A to point B.

oh and about the notion of whether Montrose DOES or DOESNT flood? Did Whitmire think to send staff to observe by walking  up or down Montrose Blvd - instead of driving— during the next big rain, to understand the Montrose drainage problem?  
Walking the neighborhood helps to understand that Montrose Blvd area  does indeed get huge amounts of water up over curbs and onto properties and under houses,  after those big  rains. You notice all that water,  if you walk streets  close  to Montrose Blvd……not blocks and blocks away.

 

The experiences of residents that actually LIVE close to Montrose Blvd- seem to be relevant in understanding the Montrose Blvd project.

 

 

 

 

 

[j_cuevas713]

On 11/3/2024 at 9:35 AM, hbg.50 said:

Your opposition is more than Mayor Whitmire.   In every case where he has inserted himself in the middle it has been in response to neighborhood citizen's concerns (i.e., Houston Avenue, 11th Street, Shepherd/Durham, Montrose) including the most recent roundabout dust up. 

From my perspective the pro- bike lobby needs to make a stronger case for bike lanes and demonstrate more usage.  Otherwise, although vocal, it's a small constituency that has lost all the clout it had in city hall when Whitmire was elected.  I see him in office for another 7 years.

You're missing the bigger issue. This isn't about bike lanes but building streets that accomdate everyone, not just cars. The new plan is barely ADA compliant. But if you need some data, I'd suggest you look at other cities and their current push on bike infrastructure and why it's so important. A simple Google search will provide countless data points. To think you need a stronger case for something proven time and time again is getting ridiculous. The same argument applies to walkability. That study has been tested to the point of exhaustion. Where walkability exists, commerce thrives. As for speeding on Montrose, data shows that narrower lanes slow drivers down and prevents crashes by up to 50%. This mayor claims he's all about data but ignores it every chance he gets. And you're always going to have voices against something, but democracy doesn't run on the ideas of the minority but the majority. Over 5 years of planning to have a mayor who hasn't been in office for a year push through a plan we didn't ask for. Many of us took time off from work to give input over the course of those 5 years and it's a serious slap in the face. 

Edited November 4, 2024 by j_cuevas713